Author: Uri Blass
Date: 03:10:47 02/06/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 06, 2003 at 05:32:06, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On February 05, 2003 at 20:50:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On February 05, 2003 at 20:23:50, Albert Silver wrote: >> >>>On February 05, 2003 at 18:36:52, Timothy J. Frohlick wrote: >>> >>>>Martin, >>>> >>>>I think that Kasparov saw a possible win but didn't think that it was worth the >>>>effort to play another 50 to 100 moves. These games don't affect his rating or >>>>standing in the "real" chess world. He would deny this whole proposition of >>>>course. I think that he got fatigued and didn't want to risk a loss. >>>> >>>>TJF >>> >>>Fatigued at 1 game every 3 days? Allow me to express my doubts.... >>> >>> Albert >> >> >>I think "weary" might be better. >> >>I watched this game, and the move g3 was _not_ hard to find. It appears to me >>that he analyzed this carefully and said "if I play g3, I think it wins for >>white, but the tactics are difficult and complex and I might well make yet >>another mistake and turn a win into a loss. However, if I play Bxh7+, my >>opponent will obviously see the instant perpetual and take it, letting me off >>with a draw, without my having to offer a draw." >> >>Whether that happened or not is only speculation. But as a human, I would play >>g3 without much thought as any non-checking move is instantly fatal, and the >>checking move simply delays the decision for a move... > > >Yeah! But you are a scientist, you have an open mind, and you are not full of >crappy money greed! Of course - you also don't present such a chess talent. >These guys know whom they bought. Kasparov is perhaps the most greedy >chessplayer on the tour. And I won't deny that Karpov is in principal not very >different. If I told you where he had his money in the seventies, you would e >astonished. In the times of the Iron Curtain. It came up through a little crime >in Germany. Also in the CC shows Karpov made the same deals right from the >beginning. But let there be no mistake. THey all didn't take these shows for >serious. So for them it was easy cash. Who wanted to blame them? Would we >renounce? Ok. Minus some. > >In a post to "Cohonas" I tried to analyse the situation in such a show deal or >gamble. It would really help, Bob, if you could add a few comments about the >specific difficulties of human GM against comp. If they try anti-comp, that >means big preps and ridiculous self-esteem and reactions in the peer group. That >is why only average freaks are so eager at anti-comp. And please do not always >repeat that anti-comp is over since 10 years. Not! Anti-comp has not yet begun! > > >Rolf Tueschen Let hope that kasparov or kramnik do not get another match in the near future(otherwise more people may believe in the conspiracy theory). I think that in the future part of the prize for winning should be to get another match for money with the machine when in case of loss another human will get the money for another match and only in case of a loss of some 2700 GM's kasparov may get again the right to play for money against the machine. Uri
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.